I write to you as a concerned Australian who has been closely monitoring
world government reactions to WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange.
I note that your names both appear on DoJ documents relating to the US
government's Grand Jury, and I assume you are both actively involved in
this investigation.

I urge you to step back and consider the bigger picture here. Tribal loyalties sometimes blind us to broader perspectives.

Those who consider WikiLeaks publications a threat to their national
security tend to have few qualms about similar releases embarrassing
other nations. Government officials everywhere regularly leak
information for their own purposes - often far more secret data than
anything WikiLeaks has yet revealed - and of course the media's role is
to pubish verifiable information that informs the public, just as
WikiLeaks has done.

US Department of Justice lawyers have argued that Water-boarding
prisoners is not torture, despite all evidence to the contrary, so I am
sure you will have no trouble finding a crime to fit Mr Assange, if that
is truly your goal. But persecuting Mr Assange for concocted crimes
will only further alienate public support for those you supposedly
defend. How is it in the US national interest if nobody trusts their
government? What do you achieve by making the U.S. Department of Justice
synonymous with Orwellian attacks on the truth?

I urge you to read the following article by Mr Assange, in which he puts
WikiLeaks current activities into an historical perspective:

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

1st Dec 2011. It was a long time since WikiLeaks had handed Los Del Guardian the massive Cablegate scoop. After raking in the profits, journos at the UK Guardian newspaper had also successfully taken the lead in smearing Julian Assange to a global audience. Thanks to spineless toads like former WikiLeaks staffer James Ball, the enigmatic Australian was now widely smeared as an anti-Semite and a sexual deviant.

Guardian CEO Alan Rusbridger's hacks, including his brother-in-law David Leigh, couldn't help high-fiving each other:

Then WikiLeaks published the #SpyFiles, defying media reports that the organisation was set to disappear:

While the global media scrambled to report the latest WikiLeaks release, the Guardian completely ignored the story. I was not impressed :

It was time to ask Los Del Guardian what was going on...

Finally one Guardian journo went off reservation, at least momentarily, and spoke the truth. James Ball tried to jump in and repair the damage:

James Ball kept insisting that this was old news. Just a bunch of brochures. Nothing newsworthy...

Oh dear.

I tried to point out the ridiculousness of this situation.

I tried to contact James Ball again but suddenly I couldn't.

Yep, he blocked me.

But that's not all. Shortly thereafter I discovered that I was also blocked by Alan Rusbridger, David Leigh, and every other Guardian journalist I tried to contact. So... Did a Guardian editorial directive go out to the whole office, telling people to block me? For what? Telling them to report the news?

A bit of background: a few days earlier I had contacted dozens of Guardian journos by Twitter, trying to find just one single individual who did not agree with Rusbridger's negative opinions on Assange and WikiLeaks. Ryan Gallagher was the only one who responded with anything moderately supportive, but he soon backed off when pressed (from memory, he took the WikiLeaks Is Good But Assange Is Destroying It line, then told me to shut up).

So why didn't The Guardian want to report on WikiLeaks #SPYFILES release? Could it be that the UK's leading left-wing newspaper is really just another Guardian of the UK Establishment, protecting British companies doing secretive "security" business with despotic regimes around the world? Is that why the Guardian also redacted the names of multiple UK corporations from the #CABLEGATE release?

It's what they like to call "national security". Like other newspaper chiefs, Alan Rusbridger gets invites to discuss it with the UK's top politicians and spy chiefs. In secretive meetings, they agree what can and cannot be reported in the media.

And WikiLeaks is a thorn in their sides.

Post Script: An excellent article on Spy Files by Pratap Chatterjee (not a Guardian journalist) was eventually posted in the Guardian's Comment Is Free opinion section (not "real" news). This appears to be the only Spy Files story run by the paper.

Forward emails to your
friends, family, politicians and the media! Flood twitter and talkback radio, post comments on
articles, facebook, and blogs! Include a picture of you with
your flag protest! Let's get the conversation started!

Thursday, January 5, 2012

UPDATE 1: I have set up a new blog with a list of ALL Oz MPs and Senators and their responses regarding WikiLeaks and Assange. Check out OzWikiWatch!
UPDATE 2. I have replied to my local MPs response and asked for an interview. See text below.
I finally got a response from my local MP after asking him to speak up for Julian Assange:

Dear Mr Lord

Thank you for your recent email WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. I apologise for the delay in replying.

As you say, Prime Minister misstepped when originally commenting on Mr Assange’s case. While unfair, I am not sure whether those comments have in fact prejudiced the extradition application under appeal in the United Kingdom.

Given your strong views about Mr Assange, I encourage you to contact the newly-appointed Attorney-General, the Hon Nicola Roxon MP, to make your case for government intervention.

As a Member of the Labor Government, the Attorney-General is best placed to advocate on his behalf:

It's not a lot, but it's something (my bolded text). If we have MPs on record like this then it makes it hard for them to change positions at a later date. Please contact your own local MP and ask them to support WikiLeaks.

Meanwhile, I will urge my local MP to do a bit more... ;-)

UPDATE 2: My latest reply to Mr Ciobo:

Mr Ciobo,

Thank you for replying to my email. I assume you aware that Julian
Assange faces his final UK appeal in the Supreme Court this week. If he
is extradited to Sweden, he will be held in solitary confinement until
his case is heard by a jury of three including two politicians. Such conditions make a mockery of justice.

Whatever the outcome of the Swedish case - and even if the UK court
overturns his extradition order - the US government is determined to
extradite him to face a secretive Grand Jury in Virginia, which has been
seeking to build a case against Assange for over a year. This is
despite the fact that - as even the AFP have noted - Assange has broken
no laws. In fact, WikiLeaks was specifically set up to work withing
existing legal frameworks.

In these circumstances, silence by Australian politicians such as
yourself is not acceptable. It is not enough to merely note that Assange
has a right to a fair trial, and to forward any further contact to the
Attorney General or other departments. Australian MPs and Senators need
to speak up publicly and demand assurances that Julian Assange will be
allowed to return home to and left to live and work in peace. Your voice
is needed NOW!

To this end, I have set up a public register of Australian MPs and Senators here: http://ozwikiwatch.blogspot.com

You are being rated on your expressed public support for WikiLeaks and
Assange. With polls showing that WikiLeaks has the backing of 80% of
Australians, you can be assured that this will be a major issue at the
next election.

I would like to make an appointment to discuss this issue with you in
more details. Please let me know a convenient time. In the meanwhile, it
would be helpful if you familiarise yourself further with the details
of the case here: http://www.justice4assange.com

Search This Blog

Insanity Is Not The Only Option

"When people start connecting the dots between climate change, global economic instability and their own personal suffering – stress, loneliness, depression – there is the potential for a movement that will truly change the world."